This slipped past me... I have already examined the source and test compatability of collections 3.0 and 2.1: http://www.mail-archive.com/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/msg37636.html
Binary compatability is much more difficult to test for. As there is no automated tool, some binary incompatabilities did occur, mainly affecting the IteratorUtils class. See mail just sent today, header [collections]. I also ought to point out that I sent mails about binary incompatabilities in the upcoming 3.1 a few days ago and no-one replied. It is quite difficult to manage a project with limited feedback! Stephen From: "Craig R. McClanahan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >I have avoided commenting on digester/beanutils issues with collections, as > >I believe the long term proposed solution of separation to be correct > >(commons components should be pretty isolated). However, at the very least > >it needs to be made clear in any release notes that digester and beanutils > >will run correctly with either 2.1 or 3.0. Perhaps that way tomcat can be > >convinced to change to 3.0. > > > > > From what I can see on TOMCAT-DEV, the Tomcat developers think that > there are backwards incompatibilities for Tomcat users (beyond any > issues that might affect Tomcat itself). Based on that, I've certainly > been one of those casting aspersions. If we're all full of it, a > [collections] statement on the nature and scope of backwards > compatibility, pointing out the error of our (Tomcat developers and my) > ways, would go a long ways towards addressing this concern. > > Struts is shortly going to be in the same boat ... the dependency of > Struts itself on collections is only that inherited from > Digester/BeanUtils; but the Struts developers will want to ensure that > an upgrade to Collections 3.0 won't cause undue problems for users of > Struts, before we switch. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
